In
the past few months the 400W Double Ended (DE) lamps have generated
significant interest among the reef hobbyists. These lamps were
tested in a previous article [1], this article presents test
results on the fixtures/reflectors available for these lamps.
The reflectors were tested using the same setup and methodology
as used for the tests on other reflectors, described in [2,3].
The data is also presented in an identical manner with plots
for light dispersion for each reflector at distances of 6",
9" and 12" from the center of the lamp. This article continues
in a similar vein and presents the data and analysis of the
400W DE reflectors manufactured by HappyReefing.com and Icecap.
Table
1: Listing of the Reflectors Tested
Reflector
Ballast
Lamp
HappyReefing.com
400W
PFO HQI Ballast
HappyReefing
400W DE 10000K
Icecap
400W
PFO HQI Ballast
HappyReefing
400W DE 10000K
To
enable a direct comparison, the Icecap fixture was modified
to accept the HappyReefing.com's 400W DE 10000K lamp and to
run on the PFO HQI ballast. Thus both reflectors are tested
with the same lamp and ballast, allowing for a direct comparison.
The
arrival of the 400W DE lamps posses the question - Are the 400W
DE lamps much better than their single ended counter parts.
? As seen in the earlier article, the 400 DE lamp and ballast
with the highest PAR output (400W DE 10000K from Happyreefing.com
- 229 PPFD) is comparable in output to the single ended lamp
and ballast with the highest PAR output (400W XM 10000K on a
Taiwan HQI ballast - 224 PPFD). The next question is - Do the
reflector systems for the 400W DE make the lamp/ballast/reflector
system for the DE lamps produce more light than the SE versions.
To
address this question, a comparison is made with the 400W Diamond
Light Lumen Arc III reflector data (tested previously in [2,3]).
The
data for the Lumen Arc III reflector running a Ushio 400W 10000K
lamp on a magnetic (M59) ballast was presented in [2]. Since
this was tested using a completely different lamp and ballast,
an adequate comparison can only be made by using a SE lamp and
ballast with similar light output. In this case this would be
the XM400W 10000K running on the Taiwan HQI ballast. The PPFD
for the Ushio 400W with magnetic ballast at 18" from lamp was
123 PPFD and that of the XM 400W 10000K with the Taiwan HQI
ballast was 224 PPFD. So, if the XM lamp and Taiwan HQI ballast
was used in the Lumen Arc III reflector, the raw data for the
Lumen Arc III should be scaled up by a factor of (224/123 =
1.82). Given that the lamp geometry is the same for the Ushio
and the XM it is reasonable to assume that the reflector output
will scale with lamp intensity. The data for the scaled Lumen
Arc III reflector is also presented for comparison.
Reflector
Data and Analysis
The
data plots for each reflector at the distances 6", 9", and 12"
are plotted as a surface graph, top view graph, and a % distribution
graph to illustrate the intensity and spread at different points
on the measuring grid. Table 2 below shows the list of figures
associated with each reflector.
Table
2: List of Figures associated with each reflector
Reflector
Figures
HappyReefing.com
Figs.
1-3
Icecap
Figs.
4-6
Lumen
Arc III (scaled)
Figs.
7-9
One
of the measures of a reflector performance could be its ability
to direct light into the aquarium. A reflector's total incident
light upon a surface of a given area is representative of the
performance of a reflector. It is computed by adding up all
the measurements taken at the discrete points within the region.
It demonstrates how much light the reflector is able to focus
downward when compared to other reflectors with similar operating
conditions (same ballast and lamp). While it can be argued that
adding all the PPFD values is technically not a valid measure
as per the definition of PPFD (since PPFD is defined as microEinstiens/m2/sec),
it can be used to provide a metric for reflector performance.
Further summing over the data points on a given area can easily
be used to compute the average, if so desired. Since the area
under consideration is the same for all reflectors, we can just
as well use the sum of the PPFD values distributed over this
area (169 data points) instead of an average as a performance
metric.
Table
3 presents this data for the reflectors in this article.
Table
3: Total Incident PPFD on a given Surface area
Total
Incident Light
Reflector:
Distance:
3x3
Area
2x2
Area
1x1
Area
Maximum
PPFD:
HappyReefing.com
6"
67182
66279
52482
4301
9"
63171
56095
36483
2155
12"
62405
53254
30652
1578
Icecap
6"
80762
79618
63988
6203
9"
76455
70041
46540
3523
12"
72019
60286
36489
2434
Lumen
Arc III - scaled
6"
83979
83900
61047
4459
9"
82476
77864
54223
2799
12"
77809
68892
39242
1852
In
addition to knowing how much light is incident on a given area,
we could also look at how much loss of light occurs on a given
area when moving the lamp and reflector higher. Table 4, presents
the % of light lost on a specified area as one moves the lamp/reflector
from 6" to 12" above the surface. A higher % loss would indicate
that the reflector is creating a larger spread.
Proud
sponsor of this column
Proud
sponsor of this column
Table
4: Percent of PPFD lost from 6" to 12" from the lamp
3x3'
Area
2x2'
Area
1x1'
Area
HappyReefing.com
7.1
19.65
41.59
Icecap
10.8
24.28
42.9
Lumen
Arc III - Scaled
7.3
17.8
35.7
Conclusion
This
article is the 4th in this series and presents the data and
a brief analysis of the 400W DE reflector systems available
in the hobby and comparison with the 400W Lumen Arc III reflector.
The data provided shows that the 3 different reflector systems
have a different geometric distribution of light, with the HappyReefing.com
reflector having a more rounded light distribution, compared
to the Icecap reflector which has a more oval distribution.
The Lumen Arc III has a square distribution. From the intensity
plots it is also quite clear that the Icecap reflector does
provide higher amounts of light leaving the reflector compared
to the Happyreefing.com reflector. The peaks attained by the
Icecap reflector are much higher than the other reflectors,
and in all case these reflectors produced peak values that far
exceed mid day PAR values in the tropics (~2000), albeit on
a small area . This should be taken into account when placing
the reflectors over the tank. To mitigate the effect of the
high intensity at the center, it might be advisable to run these
reflector at least 12 inches above the water surface. Further,
it can also be seen from the data that the DE systems are comparable
performance to SE systems.
In
conclusion, the 400DE systems are an attractive option for the
reef aquarist, however the data does not support the view that
the 400W DE systems significantly outperform the SE systems
available.
Acknowledgements
We
would like to thank several people whose help made this study
possible. They were kind enough to provide us with lamps, reflectors
and ballasts for testing: Patrick at PFO Lighting, Andy at Icecap
and Nguyen at HappyReefing.com.